Why The Second Amendment Protects The AR-15

Anti-gunners often claim the Second Amendment does not protect the right to keep and bear semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15.

AR-15s are, after all, assault rifles. They’re big and black with straps, clips, scopes and handles everywhere. Terrifying they are, and they should. They are made for military assaults in dangerous situations where highly trained soldiers need to mow down throngs of bad guys in moments. Don’t tell me otherwise, I’ve seen them doing just that in the movies for decades.

That’s pretty much what most gun neophytes think. Little do they realize that my old wood .22 shoots just as fast, holds more bullets, and is every bit as deadly albeit not from as far away.

They also don’t realize that our founding father’s spelled out exactly how to determine what arms are covered by the Second Amendment, and it’s not just muskets from the revolutionary war.

The Second Amendment has never been recondite, it is only the judges who have been obtuse. An intelligible interpretation of the Second Amendment emerges the instant one reconciles the prefatory and operative clauses. In other words, the “militia” described in the prefatory clause is a militia composed of a people with a right to keep and bear arms. What type of arms? In 1939, the Supreme Court spoke explicitly to this. At the time the Second Amendment was adopted, men summoned to militia duty were expected “to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.” The Amendment not only protects weapons that might be useful in a military context, arguably it only protects those weapons useful in military service.”

There are continually cases heard in courts around the country where left-wing activist judges don’t seem to understand the 2nd Amendment. This is egregious to say the least as these people are put into positions of power specifically to uphold the laws of the constitution.

The Washington Times goes on to describe one such case:

Thus, we arrive at the 4th Circuit decision that even though AR-15 rifles are commonplace, they may be banned because they are “like” M-16s and “useful in military service.” As the dissenting judges noted, this curious logic would have made it possible to ban the muskets and rifles used by citizen militia during the Revolutionary War. But why stop there? Handguns are standard-issue military weapons. Shotguns and bolt-action rifles have been employed by the U.S. military. At one time or place, virtually every weapon has been used by the military, including knives and tomahawks. The irresistible conclusion is that the Second Amendment protects nothing.

As long as there are hoplophobes in the country, there will always be someone fighting to take away the rights that are intended to be protected by our government and the Second Amendment. Government didn’t “give” these rights to Americans; they only protect them.